CONSPIRACY DENIERS RESEARCH LINKS

Prestigious People On Conspiracy:


Professor Antony Sutton https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Antony_Sutton


Professor Kerry Bolton https://www.kerrybolton.com/biography/

Professor Carol Quigley https://www.amazon.ca/Tragedy-Hope-History-World-Time/dp/094500110X


Senator Gary Allen https://www.amazon.ca/None-Dare-Call-Conspiracy-Allen-ebook/dp/B014VM6TCA/ref=sr_1_1?crid=24AFQC8DIVDUK&keywords=none+dare+call+it+conspiracy&qid=1590118753&s=books&sprefix=none+dare+call+it+%2Cstripbooks%2C210&sr=1-1


Nicholas Haggar https://www.amazon.com/Nicholas-Hagger/e/B001K7UC00?ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1&qid=1590145684&sr=1-1

G Edward Griffin https://www.amazon.com/G.-Edward-Griffin/e/B001KMN0ZE%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share


James H. Billington https://www.amazon.ca/Fire-Minds-Men-Origins-Revolutionary-ebook/dp/B076QGHR6W/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=fire+in+the+minds+of+men&qid=1590118951&s=books&sr=1-1


Lt. James Bo Gritz https://www.amazon.com/Nation-Betrayed-James-Bo-Gritz/dp/B003REHQWQ


Phyllis Schlafly

https://www.amazon.com/Betrayers-Phyllis-Schlafly/dp/B0006CY0CQ/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=the+betrayers%2C+schlafly&qid=1590168495&s=books&sr=1-1

Are There ‘Conspiracies’?

Much of what has been considered so far already sounds like ‘conspiracy theory’. The allegation that someone is a ‘conspiracy theorist’ is supposed to shut down a discussion immediately, having a similar effect as alleging that someone is a ‘nazi’, an ‘anti-Semite’, ‘holocaust denier’, ‘racist’, and so forth. The instant ridicule of ‘conspiracy theories’ especially from academia is fairly predicable given that ‘scholars’ tend to be narrowly focused and quite incapable of synthesising knowledge from a variety of disciplines. There is also the pull of conformity and respectability within academia. There are noteworthy exceptions such as Dr Richard Spence, Chair of the History Department of the University of Idaho, who teachers an honours programme on the role of secret societies in history; and Dr Mark Mirabello, Professor of History at Shawnee State University, who teaches on many subjects relevant to this book, including: legend, myth and folklore; intellectual history; gnosticism; alternative religions and cults, revolutionary Europe, etc. The law courts hear evidence for criminal conspiracies every day. There are financial conspiracies, such as ‘insider trading’. The Mafia is generally accepted as a centuries old international criminal conspiracy whose tentacles starting from families in the hills of medieval Sicily, have come to encompass many states, to have influenced politicians, and to have had the rich and powerful in their entourage or on their payroll. The same can be said of the Chinese Triads, which have been a major political influence. There have been conspiracies that have been both religious and criminal in nature, such as the Thuggee in India. The Ku Klux Klan is a secret society that achieved immense political influence during the 1920s. Yet if someone suggests that there might be political conspiracies involving Freemasonry, occult societies or banking dynasties, this is laughed out of court by orthodox academia. There is nothing particularly extraordinary about the existence of conspiracies. A conspiracy is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as: a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful: a conspiracy to destroy the government. A ‘criminal conspiracy’ is defined in US law as ‘conspiracies against the public, or such as endanger the public health, violate public morals, insult public justice, destroy the public peace, or affect public trade or business.1 That such conspiracies exist is obvious enough, but we are expected to disregard any such notion when it comes to secret societies, bankers, political lobbies, etc. Comparatively recently, the widespread conspiracy of Lodge P2, deriving from the Italian Grand Orient, exposed a colossal conspiracy that reached into the highest levels of Government and the Vatican. Presumably we are expected to regard this as an anomaly. Was Dwight Eisenhower a crank ‘conspiracy theorist’ when in his 1961 Farwell presidential address to the American people, he warned of a ‘military-industrial complex’ of wide-ranging implications, reaching throughout throughout US society: Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.2 While I have written extensively of this ‘military-industrial complex’ elsewhere3 we are here dealing specifically with occult societies, but the principle remains. Eisenhower’s warnings on hidden and pervasive agendas are as applicable to secret societies as they are to the often hidden agendas of transnational corporations. Dr Mirabello, an academic of rare independence of mind, has stated of such secret societies, in a manner that is directly in accord with the purpose of this book: ‘Secret Societies’ are conspiracies working covertly to achieve a hidden agenda. For members, secrecy is a sanctuary and a source of power. Secret societies often claim to be ancient and they claim direct ‘initiatory descent from a fabled founder or group of founders. By definition, no secret society can appear to be a novelty. Secret societies have various functions, usually esoteric, political, or charitable in nature. Secret societies may plot world domination, subvert legal or financial institutions, enlighten the world, distribute charity, protect a secret, or ‘attempt to rewrite history by circulating certain literature’.4 Mirabello defines six types of secret society: In the first type, the existence of the group is known and the membership is public knowledge, but the rituals and the meetings are secret. This describes the Freemasons. In the second type, the membership and the objectives are public knowledge, but all meetings are private. This describes the Bilderberg Group. In the third type, the existence of the group is known, but the membership and the objectives of the organization are secret. This describes the Hellfire Club. In the fourth type, the existence of the group is rumored, but few, if any, concrete facts are known about the group. This describes the Illuminati. In the fifth type, the existence of the group is rumored, the identities of the members are secret, but the rituals and the objectives are known. This describes the Odin Brotherhood. In the sixth type, the existence of the group is denied, but the identities of the members and the objectives of the group are known. This describes the Mafia.5 Mirabello lists secret societies of various types, including the Order of the Assassins, Black Hand, Broederbond, Illuminati, Knights of the Apocalypse, Ku Klux Klan, Leopard Society, Luddites, Mafia, Odin Brotherhood, Order of the Skull & Bones/Lodge 322, and the Cult of Thuggee.6

The Beginnings of Conspiratorial Theory The French Revolution The allegation of an occult conspiracy to establish a Universal Republic on the ruins of altars and thrones arose during the tumult of the French Revolution. The Grand Orient de France, with Grand Orient branches spreading throughout Europe, and distinct from the English form, had an anti-clerical and radical political orientation, bringing Masonry into conflict with the Catholic Church. Catholic responses to Freemasonry have included many books by Cardinals and laymen alike.

The French cleric, the Abbé Augustin Barruel was among the first writers to ascribe occult influences to the French Revolution, and his views have remained seminal. In 1797 he wrote the five volume Memoire pur servir a l’histoire du jacobinisme (‘Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism’), tracing the origins of revolution and subversion to the Knights Templar. This Templar theme has continued to the present with such popular books as The Temple & the Lodge. Barruel wrote: At an early period of the French revolution, there appeared a Sect calling itself Jacobin, and teaching that all men were equal and free! In the name of their Equality and disorganising Liberty, they trampled under foot the altar and the throne, they stimulate all nations to rebellion aimed at plunging them ultimately into the horrors of anarchy [sic]…. It was under the auspices of this Sect, and by their intrigues, influence, and impulse that France beheld itself a prey to every crime; that its foil was tainted with the blood of its pontiffs and priests, of its rich men and nobles, with the blood of every class of citizens, without regard to ranks, age or sex!

-Prof Kerry Bolton, The Occult & Subversive Movements: Tradition & Counter-Tradition in the Struggle for World Power


PROOFS OF A CONSPIRACY - JOHN ROBISON A. M. PROFESSOR OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY, AND SECRETARY TO THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF EDINBURGH. 1798


“Those who believe that major world events result from planning are laughed at for believing in the "conspiracy theory of history." Of course, no one in this modern day and age really believes in the conspiracy theory of history - except those who have taken the time to study the subject.  When you think about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen. In reality, it is the accidental theory of history preached in the unhallowed Halls of Ivy which should be ridiculed. Otherwise, why does every recent administration make the same mistakes as the previous ones? Why do they repeat the errors of the past which produce inflation, depressions and war? Why does our State Department "stumble" from one Communist-aiding "blunder" to another? If you believe it is all an accident or the result of mysterious and unexplainable tides of history, you will be regarded as an "intellectual" who understands that we live in a complex world. If you believe that something like 32,496 consecutive coincidences over the past forty years stretches the law of averages a bit, you are a kook!


Why is it that virtually all "reputable" scholars and mass media columnists and commentators reject the cause and effect or conspiratorial theory of history? Primarily, most scholars follow the crowd in the academic world just as most women follow fashions. To buck the tide means social and professional ostracism. The same is true of the mass media. While professors and pontificators profess to be tolerant and broadminded, in practice it's strictly a one way street - with all traffic flowing left. A Maoist can be tolerated by Liberals of Ivory Towerland or by the Establishment's media pundits, but to be a conservative, and a conservative who propounds a conspiratorial view, is absolutely verboten. Secondly, these people have over the years acquired a strong vested emotional interest in their own errors. Their intellects and egos are totally committed to the accidental theory. Most people are highly reluctant to admit that they have been conned or have shown poor judgment. To inspect the evidence of the existence of a conspiracy guiding our political destiny from behind the scenes would force many of these people to repudiate a lifetime of accumulated opinions. It takes a person with strong character indeed to face the facts and admit he has been wrong even if it was because he was uninformed. Politicians and "intellectuals" are attracted to the concept that events are propelled by some mysterious tide of history or happen by accident. By this reasoning they hope to escape the blame when things go wrong. Most intellectuals, pseudo and otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory of history simply by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It can't be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn't work, these "objective" scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks, ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and effort defending himself. However, the most effective weapons used against the conspiratorial theory of history are ridicule and satire. These extremely potent weapons can be cleverly used to avoid any honest attempt at refuting the facts.


It is not true, however, to state that there are no members of the intellectual elite who subscribe to the conspiratorial theory of history. For example, there is Professor Carroll Quigley of the Foreign Service School at Georgetown University. Professor Quigley can hardly be accused of being a "right wing extremist." (Those three words have been made inseparable by the mass media.) Dr. Quigley has all the "liberal" credentials, having taught at the Liberal Establishment's

academic Meccas of Princeton and Harvard. In his 1350-page, 5 pound tome Tragedy and Hope, Dr. Quigley reveals the existence of the conspiratorial network which will be discussed in this book. The Professor is not merely formulating a theory, but revealing this network's existence from firsthand experience. He also makes it clear that it is only the network's secrecy and not their goals to which he objects. Professor Quigley discloses: "I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I HAVE NO AVERSION TO IT OR TO MOST OF ITS AIMS AND HAVE, FOR MUCH OF MY LIFE, BEEN CLOSE TO IT AND TO MANY OF ITS INSTRUMENTS. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies…but in general my chief difference of opinion is that IT WISHES TO REMAIN UNKNOWN, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."

“There are also religious leaders who are aware of the existence of this conspiracy. In a UPI story dated December 27, 1965, Father Pedro Arrupe, head of the Jesuit Order of the Roman Catholic Church, made the following charges during his remarks to the Ecumenical Council: "This…Godless society operates in an extremely efficient manner at least in its higher levels of leadership. It makes use of every possible means at its disposal, be they scientific, technical, social or economic. It follows a perfectly mapped-out strategy. It holds almost complete sway in international organizations, in financial circles, in the field of mass communications; press, cinema, radio and television."


“It must be remembered that the first job of any conspiracy, whether it be in politics, crime or within a business office, is to convince everyone else that no conspiracy exists.”

-Allen, Gary. None Dare Call It Conspiracy


QUOTES: 

President Andrew Jackson 1829-1837: “you are a den of Vipers! I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning.”"It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.”

1798: “It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.”

- George Washington 

“This Act [the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Woodrow Wilson] signs the Bill, the Invisible Government of the Monetary Power will be legalized… The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill.”

- Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. 

“Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery.”

- Thomas Jefferson 

“If the American people ever allow Private Banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

- thomas jefferson

"To play those millions of minds, to watch them slowly respond to an unseen stimulus, to guide their aspirations without their knowledge – all this whether in high capacities or in humble, is a big and endless game of chess, of ever extraordinary excitement."


  • Sidney Webb, founder of the Fabian Society

  •  “I have been convinced that we, as an Order, have come under the power of some very evil occult Order, profoundly versed in science both occult and otherwise, though not infallible, their methods being BLACK MAGIC, that is to say, electro-magnetic power, hypnotism and powerful suggestion. We are convinced that the Order is being controlled by some Sun Order, after the nature of the Illuminati, if not by that Order itself.”
  • The Duke of Brunswick (Grand Master of World Freemasonry, 1700s)

“…We see our edifice…crumbling and covering the ground with ruins, we see the destruction that our hands no longer arrest…a great sect arose, which taking for its motto the good and the happiness of man, worked in the darkness of the conspiracy to make the happiness of humanity a prey for itself. This sect is known to everyone, its brothers are known no less than in name. it is they who have undermined the foundations of the Order to the point of complete overthrow; it is by them that all humanity has been poisoned and led astray for several generations…They began by casting odium on religion…Their masters had nothing less in view than the thrones of the earth, and the governments of the nations was to be directed by their nocturnal clubs…the misuse of our order…has produced all the political and moral troubles with which the world is filled today…we must from this moment dissolve the whole Order”

Duke of Brunswick (Grand Master of German Freemasonry. Written to Brethren in 1794)


Notes on Black’s presentation 

cognitive citizenship?

conspiracy theorists abandon this…

conflates conspiracy with opposing political views to his own


Favors Occam’s razor - describes as “my favorite” (a classic tome of professional conspiracy debunkers)


attacks Alex Jones numerous times over “making money off conspiracy theories” yet does not accuse CNN or CBC of the same “crime”


many “conspiracy theories” have also been proven true. All of history is filled with nothing but conspiracy. Humans conspire by nature especially to gain illegitimate advantage. People are convicted daily in courts for criminal conspiracy. The very term “conspiracy theorist” was created by the CIA in the 60’s to dispel counter narratives to the JFK assassination and the fact that the CIA got caught smuggling drug lords and weapons into California. Yet the term is still applied generally to this day to all information that contradicts the media/political/academic narrative. This is to create distrust in the public for real journalism. 

A better term might be criminality or corruption. Which exists and is the rule not the exception. 

Also, anyone investigating criminality and corruption do so with information available due to the very fact that conspiracy implies “cover up” 

There’s this really weird and bizarre thing that criminals do which is that they try and hide the facts from investigators...

I wonder if this prestigious professor will address the biggest conspiracy of all time, which is the procurement of 2+ million children (conservative estimate) every year into the massive child/human black market trafficking industry which is worldwide, makes more money than drugs and guns combined, and rarely if ever gets any press and requires high level government officials to be on the take or directly involved in order to exist to the scale that it does. 

They can find you anywhere in the world if you skip your taxes.

They can setup “contact tracing” programs world wide overnight to track down a 99% survivability rate virus…but can’t and never will do the same to rescue millions of children? 

They Can shut down your Facebook if you don’t use gender pronouns. Yet just cant seem to find Epstein’s island until 2019...

 “Occams Razor is my favorite” - Prof David Black


https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/08/occams-razor/495332/


https://scienceblogs.com/developingintelligence/2007/05/14/why-the-simplest-theory-is-alm


mon Saphire-Bernstein, social psychologist and molecular geneticist

Answered December 18, 2014

Yes, given the definition of a psychological fallacy and the routine inapplicability of this principle in everyday conversation and argumentation.

First, a shout out to previous respondent Carson McNeil. I was irritated to have to page past the first three answers before encountering the first response that actually acknowledged the broad inapplicability of Occam's Razor to the everyday experience of the moderately educated layperson. I have this argument often with my girlfriend. I point to the current Standard Model of Quantum Physics. This model posits more than 2o distinct particles that are necessary to explain the basic observations of quantum physics. Defenders of Occam's principle seem to think that such a finding supports the principle, because the Standard Model is ostensibly the simplest possible model that can explain all the available evidence. Yet, in the contexts in which Occam's Razor is most frequently invoked, it would seem inevitably to pull us towards an intuition that says "20 distinct factors? that's way too many!" and leads instead to an insistence on a simpler, unified model (a quest that continues to drive many physicists in the present day, despite the questionable nature of the assumption that there truly is one such unified model). The scientistic obsession with Occam's Razor assumes complete and total information. Such a situation is hypothetically conceivable in some instances, but is almost never realized in actual practice. Thus the likelihood that some necessary complicating factors are excluded becomes persistent and ultimately insurmountable.

But consider the application of Occam's razor to, say, a televised debate on a contentious political controversy. How many causal factors are likely to be involved, and how many to be invoked? A consideration of the complexity of modern political phenomena argues strongly that fewer than the correct number of causal factors will be invoked. In such a real-life, time- and information-limited scenario, the application of Occam's Razor is clearly fallacious. Yet there are undoubtedly countless hundreds of relevant incidents that could be cited.

The reason this inaccurate application of an essentially defensible philosophical perspective rises to the level of a psychological fallacy is that it is interpreted by imperfect human minds as supporting an intuitive perspective rooted in human cognition that seeks to reduce complex problems to simpler ones. In exchange, we sacrifice accuracy and completeness. From the perspective of evolution, that is just fine, because a simple conclusion may be likelier to yield a useful action plan for application in the face of danger and uncertainty than contemplating deeply on the multiply interacting complexities that in fact instantiate the actual universe. That is to say, we are prone to oversimplifying complicated constellations of factors, for reasons that are entirely unrelated to principles of scientific logic, and to do so is indisputably fallacious. Many laypersons, and even some scientists, confuse this intuitive bias towards simplicity with the Occam's Razor concept, leading them to be over-rejecting towards additional complicating factors.

Think of it this way: If your model only requires 1 or 2 assumptions, this is not an application of Occam's Razor. Rather, it is almost certainly an incorrect and inadequate model. If the principle is nevertheless routinely invoked to support models of this sort, has it not then risen to the level of logical fallacy? I believe that it has. 

Become a patron to

103
Unlock 103 exclusive posts
Be part of the community
Connect via private message